A recent review paper in Restoration Ecology (Chivers et al.) summarized a lot of ideas and research to date on a topic I’ve been contemplating for some time—should(n’t) we be breeding plants to be better suited for ecological restoration?
1 Comment
Hello, my name is Anna, I’m a grad student, and I’m an ESFJ.
“Hi, Anna.” Many don’t put a lot of stock into Meyers-Briggs and other personality tests, but the majority seem to gush over how accurately the tests “get them.” I’m with the majority. I was lucky enough to guest-star on the BEACON Center's blog-- check it out! BEACON is an NSF center for the study of evolution in action, and in my opinion is the place to be if you want to do eco-evo outreach at MSU. Check out my post below (continues at the BEACON website). If you look at the lyrics of two of the most iconic songs in American history, you’ll find that both reveal the composers’ fondness for the wide open spaces of our American landscape.
I have discovered that two of my major complaints about graduate school are:
1. I actually hate working alone, and 2. There isn't any positive feedback. When you pass your comprehensive exams, or publish a paper (the "big" achievements), you're really just doing what you're supposed to do. You might get a pat on the back or a celebratory lunch with the lab, but really you're just relieved that you're not a bad student who didn't do those things. Teaching, however, is the complete opposite. There was a lot of talk this year at the 100th anniversary of the Ecological Society of America about getting permission before sharing details of anyone else's research (particularly, tweeting), apparently due to heightened fears about "scooping"-- the phenomenon in science where someone beats you to publishing research such that your work is less relevant/less ground-breaking/less publishable.
If it weren't for my exposure to the following resources, I would still think that religion and science were irreparably at odds. This conflict was always a major stumbling block to my faith. For those at the other end of the spectrum (religious, but anti-science), the conflict prevents a full appreciation of the natural world that God gave us, and often inspires decision-making that disregards the impact our world has on us today and for future generations. If the Bible is God's word, and the world is God's creation, there should be no disagreement between what we find in the two. Luckily, an increasing number of people agree with this.
This post is installment #3 of my blog series on debunking conflicts between faith & science.
Perceived conflicts between religion and science drive people away from religion and prevent others from trusting science. No matter which side you're rooting for, being able to untangle these conflicts will allow people from both sides to have real conversations about faith and about science. Many jobs have a "busy season," whether it's final exams for students, winter holidays for retailers, or tax season for accountants. Mine is field season set-up in May.
This post is installment #2 of my blog series on debunking conflicts between faith & science. Perceived conflicts between religion and science drive people away from religion and prevent others from trusting science. No matter which side you're rooting for, being able to untangle these conflicts will allow people from both sides to have real conversations about faith and about science. My whole life, I believed that evolution proved that the creation story in Genesis 1 didn't happen. Even though I wanted to believe in God, it was a big stumbling block for my faith that so many Bible stories seemed impossible or disprovable with science or reason. I've since learned that the all-literal view of how to read the Bible doesn't just conflict with science, it also conflicts with the intentions of the Bible. Yes, a lot of things in the Bible literally happened, and it's important to know which ones. But it's also important to know which parts were never supposed to be read literally, and why. We can't just write-off all the verses that don't make literal sense and believe all the ones we like, but we can-- and should-- take a closer look at the nonsensical ones and decide if it even makes Biblical sense to read them literally. I was lucky enough to get to share this story with my church this past Sunday after the service in a talk called “Faith or Science: Friends or Foes?” And now thanks to the world-wide-web, I can also share it with you!
|
This site is no longer regularly updated, but if you're an early-career plant scientist with something to say, you're welcome (and encouraged!) to submit a post. Contact Anna Funk using this form for information.
Archives
July 2020
Categories
All
|